The purpose of this paper is to clarify the characteristics of Singapore's education policy and views on education and academic ability which are promoting new educational reforms aimed at the post-COVID era. Singapore's education situation continually evolves, and the country is known for maintaining a high level of academic ability. The streaming system, which has been the basis of Singapore's education system for years, is currently being phased out and replaced with a new subject-based banding system called “full subject-based banding (FSBB)”. The views on education and academic ability that lie behind this are also changing. Education in Singapore has moved towards fostering 21st century academic ability; what will this look like going forward? This paper explores the above question utilizing information obtained through discussions with primary and secondary school teachers, and investigates teachers' perceptions and some educational practices. Analysis of papers and of these discussions reveals that Singapore’s education now places a greater focus on respecting students' individual talents and implementing differentiated teaching and learning in order to enhance a variety of abilities, while promoting students' joy of learning through learner-centered and inquiry-based learning. In practice, schools have formulated original approaches that match the direction of the MOE policy and are engaged in educational activities to develop academic ability for the 21st century, while clearly displaying the characteristics of each school. Various measures have been devised to mitigate the intensification of competition, such as initiatives that value students’ autonomy and a variety of evaluation methods which do not rely on paper tests, including portfolios and journals. Teachers' awareness and responsiveness are also increasing students' motivation to learn, helping them develop their talents. In conclusion, Singapore has not hesitated to change its education system with an eye to the future and will continue to practice educational innovation. In particular, it should be noted that the three education streams (based on academic achievement in the Primary School Leaving Examination) that have characterized Singapore’s education will be discontinued. Instead, there will be one single secondary education with many subject bands, making it possible for students to take up varying combinations of subjects based on their strengths. This will bring about more social mixing and encourage students to help one another. While the system will be replaced by subject-based (“subject-by-subject”) banding, the new policy has the implications of respecting individuality and of guaranteeing equality of educational opportunities based on ability, rather than selecting elites who have comprehensive abilities. Moreover, educational considerations are acknowledged to contribute to improving self-esteem, and the elimination of the course system is seen as fostering cooperation and character development by enabling mixing and learning with diverse students. In this sense, the new system can be regarded as an effective means of differentiating and optimizing education, and provides some suggestions about new perspectives on education and academic ability.

View full abstract

The characteristics of curricula and teaching methods for children with learning disabilities are examined in this research, with a focus on curriculum development and teaching models practiced and reported in Illinois in the late 1960s. The learning disability (“LD”) concept was proposed and used in the United States in the 1950s to describe children with learning difficulties due to insufficient intellectual development. In the 1960s, it was found that learning difficulties in American school students were caused not only by psychological and physiological factors but also by social and cultural factors. In Illinois, because of the large number of immigrants, there was an increase in the number of children with reading and writing difficulties, and a corresponding increase in the number of children with poor academic achievement and slow learning. This was also sometimes described using terms such as “cultural-familial mental retardation”. On the other hand, with the increase in the number of children requiring support and the movement for the rights of persons with disabilities, the movement to have students with special educational needs study in regular classes, as far as possible, arose in the 1960s. The examples considered in this paper can be positioned as cases of this. The first example is the approach to dealing with LD children in the “Total School Curriculum.” Based on the Whole School Approach, this approach can be said to refrain from extracting and isolating LD children wherever possible, focusing instead on supporting them in their learning activities in regular classes. The Total School Curriculum in “Whole School Approach” is unique in that it specifies that the role of the teacher, especially the regular class teacher, consists of diagnosing learning difficulties in the classroom as well as teaching students. The second example is the experimental practice in Township High School District in Highland Park, Illinois. A proposal was made to change the procedures for classroom learning, to modify the curriculum, and to take special measures for children with learning disabilities. Curriculum modifications included content related to self-awareness, such as communication development and active/positive participation in remedial treatment education programs. The concept of literacy in the United States is said to have revolved around dealing with reading and writing difficulties—not solely difficulty in reading a commonly used passage to oneself or aloud, but also difficulty in understanding that passage. It emphasized the ability to answer questions in writing and to think about the passage. It is said that the attempt to conceptualize LD was a response to children who exhibit such reading and writing difficulties, as well as a comprehensive representation of learning difficulties the causation of which is difficult to attribute to other disabilities.

View full abstract

In Chile, the tuition-free higher education policy was introduced in 2016. This paper examines the achievements of the policy and points at issue. In the 1980s, the military government implemented neoliberal higher education reform, such as the diversification and deregulation of institutions and the revision of subsidies for institutions. Before then, Chilean higher education consisted of only eight public and private universities and all of them were practically free of charge. After the revision of subsidies, the institutions started to charge tuition fees and a loan system was introduced. The civilian government which took power in 1990 maintained the postreform system. After this reform was carried out by the military government, access to higher education expanded. However, the expansion was mainly supported by tuition fees or loans. The high cost and debts became a social issue. Tuition-free higher education was among the demands of a massive student movement in 2011, which was supported by public opinion. The policy became the manifesto of a candidate for the presidential election who assumed the presidency in 2014. The tuition-free policy covers students from families with incomes in the lowest 60% nationwide. The higher education institutions participating in the policy are required to have obtained accreditation for at least four years from the National Committee of Accreditation. The committee accredits the institutions and decides the length of this guarantee, ranging from one to seven years depending on the evaluation results. The institutions are also required to be non-profit, have transparent and objective admission systems, and reserve at least 20% of spaces for students from families with incomes in the lowest 40% of the national income distribution. There are no requirements for students’ grades apart from when they enter the institutions that participate in the policy. Of these higher education institutions, universities require students to pass the national entrance examination. In contrast, professional institutions (Institutos Profesionales) and technical training centers (Centros de Formación Técnica) do not require the examinations, but some require a certain level of GPA in secondary school. In 2022, tuition-free institutions comprised 36 universities, 8 professional institutions, and 22 technical training centers. The percentage of tuition-free institutions by type of institution was as follows: 62.1% of universities, 25.0% of professional institutions, and 44.0% of technical training centers. The subsidy for tuition-free education in 2021 was 1,181,925 million pesos, which is about three times the amount of the 2016 subsidy. The beneficiaries of tuition-free education numbered 138,951 in 2016 and 435,690 in 2021. At the same time, the number of beneficiaries of scholarships and loans decreased. The tuition-free policy has benefitted many students and families by reducing the cost of higher education. However, data and studies indicate that the policy has not dramatically increased opportunities for students from families of lower socioeconomic status or first-generation students.

View full abstract